Catch at the Goal Line

[TXMike]

What should we have here?  Purple is on offense, white is on defense.

[yt=425,350]SvGdIRbzkM4[/yt]

[Mike L]

A touchback and white's ball on the 20.

Let me guess, the call was momentum and white's ball at the 1.

[Curious]

Has to be a TB!

[williebe]

Gotta agree with Mike L

[Atlanta Blue]

It's not a catch until he returns to the ground.  He returned to the ground in the end zone.  Touchback.

[TxSkyBolt]

Why the BB mike?

[fbrefga]

Okay, I will be devil's advocate on this one.  The defensive player had clear, firm control of the ball and his right foot came down in bounds between the one and two yard line.  The catch was completed at that point; not when he landed in the end zone.  Within 2-2-7-a, "If one foot first lands inbounds and the receiver has possession and control of the ball, it is a catch even though a subsequent step or fall takes the receiver out of bounds".  I feel that this would still apply at the goal line.

With that, if the catch is completed extremely close to the goal line and the action continues into the end zone, a touchback would be in order.  The completion of this catch was not "extremely" close to the goal line in this instance.

[TXMike]

I don't know. Maybe cause it sucks to carry 2 around all the time and rarely get to drop one. 

[chymechowder]

touchback.

we're told to avoid splitting hairs here. they tell us not to put the ball on the one yard line for team B, unless it's really obvious that they gained "full" possession at the one.  if there's any question as to when the player gained control of the ball, call it a touchback.

I'd say this case, with the defender falling in the endzone, it should be a touchback.

[JasonTX]

I agree not to split hairs.  Touchback.  Besides, with this replay the purple player was blocking the white player so it is not certain that a foot came down outside of the end zone.  Even if it did, where did he firmly control the ball?  It looks like the ball was across the goalline by the time it was firmly in his possession.

[NVFOA_Ump]

I'd agree as well TB.  Don't see any way we can rule that B has full possession and control outside of the EZ and I'd think that if the ball came lose in the EZ as he's going to the ground we'd have an INC pass. 

[NCAA-SJ]

May I bring up another point? 
I will argue that "his" original momentum did not take him into the EZ, but rather the contact of the A player did.  Having said that, how about forward progress of an airborne receiver due to contact by an defender?

Ball spotted at 3yd line?

Having said that....touchbacks are like incomplete passes...you can't go wrong with them.  Don't screw a guy who's made a great play.

[bama_stripes]

I'm thinking that almost every official would have had this as a TB, rather than a safety, before the MX rule came in.

Touchback.

[Diablo]

I don't see momentum as a factor in this situation, but it's clear to me that forward progress is.  The airborne defender grasps the ball over the field of play.  He is immediately knocked backwards into the EZ by the Team A player and the defender maintains control of the ball. 

If the same situation were to occur entirely in the field of play, we would give Team B the ball at the yardline over which the airborne defender grasps the pass.  However, current "conventional wisdom" says, "If the goalline is involved, make it a touchback."

[TXMike]

And that is what had the B confused.  He was thinking forward progress and wanted the bag down to "sell it".  Upon very quick and further refelction, he realized touchback was the appropriate call and reported that to the R when the R got downfield.

[Morningrise]

So, are we calling this a touchback because

a) that's the rulebook answer,
b) that's not the exact rulebook answer, but it's an approved ruling or philosophy, or
c) it's neither the rulebook answer nor a codified ruling or philosophy, but it's the way to get the least grief?

I don't think a) is right, for the reasons NCAA-SJ and Diablo gave. And from the comments it's a little unclear whether b) or c) is the underlying reason.

[Andrew McCarthy]

This is my conference's philosophy document:

If there is a change of possession near the goal line (inside the 1-yard line) and there is a question as to whether possession is gained in the field of play or end zone, make the play a touchback.

[Diablo]

So, are we calling this a touchback because

a) that's the rulebook answer,
b) that's not the exact rulebook answer, but it's an approved ruling or philosophy, or
c) it's neither the rulebook answer nor a codified ruling or philosophy, but it's the way to get the least grief?

I don't think a) is right, for the reasons NCAA-SJ and Diablo gave. And from the comments it's a little unclear whether b) or c) is the underlying reason.

I'd say c) begets b).

[The Ref Thats Lef]

So what would happen if this was the team A player catching the ball that deep in the endzone and being pushed into the field of play? Would you rule his forward progress in the field of play or would you give him a TD?

[TXMike]

Fwd progress would be in the EZ, TD Are you turned around?

[The Ref Thats Lef]

Sorry Mike me not being clear. Yes turn it around. If they were in the endzone and the defender was pushing the offensive player (with the ball back out).

Would you then say the catch was not completed until he returned to ground and so give it to him in the field of play? I ask (as devils advocate) as you seem to end up with two different interpretations of what happens around the goal line depending what suits rather than what the rules say.

And can I also say what a great discussion clip.

[TXMike]

No question about it in your play.  TD.     Rules and AR address that specific situation.

[Diablo]

And that is what had the B confused.  He was thinking forward progress and wanted the bag down to "sell it".  Upon very quick and further refelction, he realized touchback was the appropriate call and reported that to the R when the R got downfield.

Upon hearing the final ruling, did Team A's head coach respond with, "But there's a bean bag at the 1.5 yardline."?
If so, what was the B's response or did he dodge a bullet?

[TXMike]

Not sure the coach even had a clue as to what was going on, or did he really care.  His team was getting thoroughly man-handled and this turnover was another nail in the coffin that was not going to help him much either way it went.  You can put it in the "dodged bullet" category I suppose.

[Osric Pureheart]

I'd think that if the ball came lose in the EZ as he's going to the ground we'd have an INC pass. 

Ding ding ding.  No need for a question of philosophy here.  If he drops it when he hits the floor I'm waving it incomplete, therefore he cannot gain possession until he finishes going to ground, therefore it has to be a touchback.